Senate pushes envelope on gridlock

Pent-up frustration over a lack of Senate votes threatens to muck up even the least controversial measures that come before the chamber.

After the recent scuttling of bipartisan bills on energy efficiency and expired jobless aid, the knotted-up chamber is reaching levels of gridlock that may make it impossible to score even legislative layups.

Text Size

-

+

reset

The next test of whether the Senate can do, well, anything comes on Monday when the chamber begins consideration of what would normally be a noncontroversial bill to reform the federal flood insurance program.

But feuding that began last November when Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) made an unprecedented change to the Senate’s filibuster rules is intensifying into an utter breakdown of the amendment process that risks throwing low-level measures like the flood bill into limbo.

“We find ourselves at the end of this rocky road, and none of us like this location,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.). “So we gotta figure out a way to get back up the road: It’s a dead end. A dead end means we do nothing, and our purpose here is we’re relegated to oversight only and not fixing things.”

It’s a fight that can make the Senate a less attractive place to work. With fewer committee bills considered before the full Senate and senators unable to get a vote on their amendments or stall nominations for political leverage, rank-and-file members are losing their influence — rapidly.

That has made it easier for senators to head for the exits rather than run for another term in a do-nothing Senate.

“It contributes a lot,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), ticking off what he sees as premature retirements of GOP senators like Olympia Snowe of Maine and Mike Johanns of Nebraska, among others. “It’s a great honor, to be here but once you’re here, you want to do your job. And you can’t do your job if you can’t have a say.”

Republicans direct much of their ire at Reid, the hard-nosed majority leader who seeks to protect vulnerable Democrats from tough votes on hot-button issues like health care, the Keystone XL pipeline and abortion. More than any other leader before him, Reid has closed off the amendment process by an arcane procedural maneuver known as “filling the tree,” prompting howls of protest from GOP senators who complain they’ve been shut out of the process.

While Reid says he has no choice but to cut off amendment votes because Republicans will not deal with him in good faith, his strategy cuts both ways. When Reid closes off the consideration of amendments, ideas from Democrats are also stifled, preventing them from offering legislation they can tout to voters back home.

Sens. Mark Begich of Alaska and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana — two of the most vulnerable Democrats up for reelection in November — are among a growing group of senators frustrated over the amendment logjam. Begich griped that he couldn’t get a vote on changing military retirement pay, while Landrieu wanted a vote on job-training and skills development proposals on the Senate’s immigration bill.

“I believe as legislators that’s our job, and I’m one of those advocates that [believes] we should allow as much open amendments as possible,” Begich said. “But I’d also say it’d be nice if they’d be relevant.”

With the Senate voting on fewer than 10 amendments under regular order since July, each bill that comes before the chamber is eagerly eyed by hungry lawmakers hoping to get a vote on their political wish list. Members are now “starving” for a chance to offer an amendment that bears their name and political priorities, according to Sen. Joe Manchin, a party-bucking West Virginia Democrat.

“People say: ‘We don’t have many amendments, so we’re going to throw everything at you,’” he said. “And other people say, ‘I got you. I want you to vote on this so I can use this against you.’”

Manchin added, “[Reid] should be open to everybody’s amendments. … I’ve heard a lot about how the process used to work. I’d like to see it one time.”

Democrats and Republicans agree the Senate needs to consider more amendments on the floor. But they also agree that the meltdown is mostly the other party’s fault. It’s precisely that intractability that stands to derail nearly any legislation in the Senate not tied to a crisis like a debt default or government shutdown.

What makes the issue complicated is that the Senate operates on a principle known as unanimous consent — meaning any one senator can object to an amendment and effectively block a vote. When Senate leaders have tried to come up with a finite list of amendments to be considered on any given bill, the process often falters, namely because it requires the sign-off of all 100 senators, many of whom feel miffed over having their pet issue bypassed for a vote.

And while there’s no rule preventing irrelevant amendments from being offered, Democrats say that Republicans continue to bring forward proposals unrelated to the bills simply to score political points.